He's just speaking God's words.
I read the news today oh boy! Page 904
Go Bish !
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-18574279
Lonesome George, the last of the Pinta turtle species is now dead. Interestingly enough, he was a native of Ecuador, wonder if the CIA had anything to do with it because of Assange?
EDIT: And yes, the Last Pinta please ladies and gentlemen gag is too obvious.
So what do people think about the memorial for bomber command?
Recognition of brave service or celebrating men who could have been tried as war criminals?
Quote: sootyj @ June 25 2012, 1:27 PM BSTSo what do people think about the memorial for bomber command?
It should be covered in Swastikas and say 'Luftwaffe Rules the Skies to Unite Europe'.
Oh wait, the reason it doesn't say that is because we used bombers to hold back the Nazi invasion and occupation of the UK.
Its interesting one for me.
Bomber command more than any other unit of the military took unbelievable casualties, 30% I believe at one point death was a statistical certainty.
The problem is thanks to their rather deranged commander. They killed civilians by the thousand for little appreciable gain.
Where as most modern analysis suggests if they'd joined the US bombers in hitting industrial and oil targets they could have drastically shortened the war.
Harris didn't even care much for his own crews. Progressively stripping his bombers of armour and useful guns.
So I'd say Bomber command should get a memorial (and one that acknowledges its victims). But Harris should lose his.
War's a funny thing.
I just saw a piece about the end of the war in Japan, and it reminded me how much I feel the Americans should have dropped The Bomb earlier. Not only might it have saved thousands of US troops (13,000 died taking Okinawa alone!), I get the feeling fewer Japanese would have died.
Thats a good point. Curtis Le May, Harris's opposite number in the states seemed to have a much better grasp of bombing. His bombing of Japanese cities knocked out industrial capacity.
Quote: sootyj @ June 25 2012, 1:58 PM BSTThe problem is thanks to their rather deranged commander. They killed civilians by the thousand for little appreciable gain.
I think that is a gross over simplification and retro-active hippy liberal propaganda at best.
'Researchers now believe...' is the re-writing of history by a group of people who weren't there and who couldn't gauge the impact of the bombings on the war effort, only the collateral aftermath.
The talks in the Oval office with the deranged commander were all transcribed. So you can see how deranged he was for yourself! No re-writing necessary.
Nope it's mainly from the point of serious historical research. The US airforce bombing of the Rumanian oil fields in 1944 crippled the Werchmacht's ability to carry out longrange operations.
So much so that they couldn't achieve any of their goals in the Ardennes counter offensive before running out of petrol.
Germany, Japan, American and England all tried terror bombing. In each case it absolutely failed to crack the opponents morale. Most Germans were fighting right up until VE day.
That Harris did this when his airforce had the most limited resources was ridiculous. He even tried to avoid the RAF supporting the D day landings.
Quote: sootyj @ June 25 2012, 2:10 PM BSTMost Germans were fighting right up until VE day.
Those Germans were fighting against the Russians and quite rightly too. Once the Commies took Berlin, it was a raping, looting, shoot 'em up fest on the civilians. The Ruskies wanted revenge and from all accounts, they got it in spades.
But yes, his plan of destroying German homes and people was highly controversial. Did it shorten the war, destroy German morale and get revenge for the bombings on London? Who knows?
Should there be a memorial to all those pilots and bomb crews who gave their lives fighting the Nazis? Absolutely.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ June 25 2012, 2:19 PM BSTThose Germans were fighting against the Russians and quite rightly too. Once the Commies took Berlin, it was a raping, looting, shoot 'em up fest on the civilians. The Ruskies wanted revenge and from all accounts, they got it in spades.
But yes, his plan of destroying German homes and people was highly controversial. Did it shorten the war, destroy German morale and get revenge for the bombings on London? Who knows?
Should there be a memorial to all those pilots and bomb crews who gave their lives fighting the Nazis? Absolutely.
Well except there was no collapse in German morale, well anywhere.
Even in Italy and Holland where to all intents and purposes the Germans were cut off and under siege. Or even at the Rhine, where one would think they would want the Allies to rush through and meet the Soviets as early as possible.
The most likely result was the same as the bombing of Russian and English cities. Rather than crush morale it strengthened it. If the Blitz didn't crack English morale, why on Earth would it do it to German morale?
The heroism of men flying in essentially unarmed and unarmoured planes, slowly through fields of flack and fighters. Knowing how they probably wouldn't see the new year. That beyond any doubt deserves celebration. The man who put them there to so little value, doesn't.
Quote: sootyj @ June 25 2012, 2:25 PM BSTWell except there was no collapse in German morale, well anywhere.
Where did you get that factoid? Just based on recent experiences such as 9/11 and 7/7, which weren't even proper aerial bombings, it has had a massive impact on how people lead their lives and the fear that they still carry.
The indescriminate bombings from both sides in the Israeli-Palestine conflict has created terror and panic all over the region.
As much as I'd like to de-humanise the Germans as emotionless robots, the bombings did have an effect on them. Did the people of Dresden get up the next morning, dust themselves down and head off to work as normal? Doubtful.
The memorial was privately funded and celebrates the fact that we are still here as a nation. Unless you can prove for certain that the acts of Bomber Command didn't help shorten the war, then this debate will remain open ended.
At some point I may be bothered to drag out some sources on the efficasy and lack of efficasy of differing bombing campaigns.
But 9/11 and 7/7 were your examples. And what was the results?
Mass surrender? Collapse of morale?
No a massive war on terror. Covering atleast 2 continents and an ongoing war by other means over pretty much the whole world. Leading to at least 2 countries being completely occupied.
Rather the opposite one would say.